Conservative and Unionist Party: a sourced timeline of public activity, with filters by source type and a sidebar of tracked totals

Conservative and Unionist Party

Showing every spoken contribution, including 5,731 under 12 words. Hide short remarks

  1. ParliamentRebecca Paul

    Digital ID

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Furniss. I am grateful to have the opportunity to speak on behalf of the more than 4,200 people in my constituency who signed the petition opposing digital ID. I very much share the concerns that many of my constituents have raised with me. The Government’s intention to roll out a mandatory digital identification scheme is a serious mistake; it will prove expensive and intrusive, and it will ultimately not move the dial on the key challenges that we face as a country. We have repeatedly been told that this scheme will help to tackle illegal immigration. Frankly, I find that insulting to the intelligence of the British public. Channel crossings will not be stopped by a QR code on a smartphone. I only wish it were that easy. They will, however, be stopped when the Government have the courage to implement real deterrents and confront the lawyers and activist judges who continue to undermine our borders and throw obstacles in the way of every attempt to tackle this crisis. The British public have always rejected the idea of ID cards, and I believe they are right to do so. We are not a nation of “papers, please”, in which people must prove their identity simply to access everyday services or interact with the state, yet we risk creating exactly that kind of society under this policy. We must remember that we are here today as representatives of the British people; we must listen and proceed with caution when nearly 3 million of them feel so strongly about an issue that they sign a petition. Let us also not forget that this issue was never put before the public in a manifesto. If the Prime Minister wanted a mandate for such a fundamental change to the relationship between citizen and state as that which would come with digital ID, he should have had the courage to ask for one at the ballot box. Hon. Members from both sides of the House have spoken today to send the Government a very simple message: mandatory digital ID is not needed to deliver excellent online public services. We already have quick, simple digital applications for passports, driving licences, and right-to-work checks. Those do not require a single state-mandated digital identity card, nor should they.

    Hansard source

  2. ParliamentPeter Fortune

    Digital ID

    Does my hon. Friend agree with me and the thousands of people across Bromley and Biggin Hill who signed the petition that at a time of rising taxation and spiralling debt, the fact that the Government cannot even tell us how much this wretched device will cost exemplifies their irresponsible approach to our economy?

    Hansard source

  3. ParliamentPeter Fortune

    Unemployment Levels

    22. What assessment he has made of trends in the level of unemployment.

    Hansard source

  4. ParliamentPeter Fortune

    Unemployment Levels

    I recently heard from Bill Perera, who runs a franchise of McDonald’s in my constituency of Bromley and Biggin Hill. He runs nine restaurants and employs nearly 800 people, 70% of whom are aged 16 to 24. He wants to increase this pathway and opportunity into employment for young people, but he is finding it increasingly difficult, because of the increased national insurance contributions. Does the Minister agree that one way to reduce unemployment would be to reverse this disastrous policy?

    Hansard source

  5. ParliamentPeter Fortune

    Topical Questions

    T5.   I have recently been contacted by constituents who are concerned that local jobcentres are not doing enough to get people back into work. What more can the Minister do to ensure that sufficient support and training help people back into employment?

    Hansard source

  6. ParliamentNick Timothy

    Maccabi Tel Aviv FC: Away Fans Ban

    (Urgent Question): To ask the Home Secretary to make a statement on the adequacy of the evidence on which West Midland police took decisions relating to the Aston Villa versus Maccabi Tel Aviv match.

    Hansard source

  7. ParliamentNick Timothy

    Maccabi Tel Aviv FC: Away Fans Ban

    I thank the Minister for that response, including the news of the HMICFRS report by the end of the year. The police intelligence used to justify the ban on Israeli fans from Villa Park has fallen apart, and so has the evidence given to the Select Committee by Chief Constable Craig Guildford and Assistant Chief Constable Mike O’Hara. The police say their information came from the Netherlands, after Maccabi Tel Aviv played Ajax last year, but the Dutch said the West Midlands intelligence report was “not true”. At the Committee, the police repeated claims—denied by the Dutch—that the fans were “militaristic”, threw people in the river and targeted Muslim civilians. They even said that the Dutch police had lied under political pressure from their own mayor. We are asked to believe that the Dutch police lied to their own people, the media, their justice and security inspectorate, their mayor, their Government and even their King, but told the truth once in a Zoom call with West Midlands police that was never even minuted. The police again claimed that the Dutch deployed 5,000 officers—a claim denied by the Dutch—but admitted to the Committee that they made up the number themselves. Asked whether a fictional match cited in the intelligence report came from artificial intelligence, Craig Guildford told the Committee “not at all”, but AI detection programmes conclude otherwise. The police have already had to apologise for wrongly telling the Committee that a local Jewish community had supported the ban. There are many questions here, but I will limit myself to four. First, did the Policing Minister believe the evidence that the police presented to the Committee? Secondly, have the police replied to the letter she sent to them two weeks ago? Thirdly, will she guarantee the publication of all relevant information and correspondence? Fourthly, does the chief constable retain her confidence as Policing Minister and the confidence of the Home Secretary? The police are accused of fabricating evidence to justify a predetermined outcome demanded by Islamists. They have had weeks to defend themselves and have failed to do so. This is fatal for public confidence in the police and in justice, and in my opinion the chief constable must go.

    Hansard source

  8. ParliamentMs Nusrat Ghani

    Maccabi Tel Aviv FC: Away Fans Ban

    I call the shadow Minister.

    Hansard source

  9. ParliamentMs Nusrat Ghani

    Maccabi Tel Aviv FC: Away Fans Ban

    I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

    Hansard source

  10. ParliamentMs Nusrat Ghani

    Maccabi Tel Aviv FC: Away Fans Ban

    I call the Chair of the Home Affairs Committee.

    Hansard source

  11. ParliamentMs Nusrat Ghani

    Maccabi Tel Aviv FC: Away Fans Ban

    I call Chris Murray, a member of the Select Committee.

    Hansard source

  12. ParliamentMs Nusrat Ghani

    Maccabi Tel Aviv FC: Away Fans Ban

    I call the Chair of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee.

    Hansard source

  13. ParliamentMs Nusrat Ghani

    Ajax Armoured Vehicle

    I call the Chair of the Defence Committee.

    Hansard source

  14. ParliamentMs Nusrat Ghani

    Ajax Armoured Vehicle

    I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

    Hansard source

  15. ParliamentMs Nusrat Ghani

    Child Poverty Strategy

    I urge colleagues to be short, as we have just 15 minutes remaining.

    Hansard source

  16. ParliamentMs Nusrat Ghani

    Child Poverty Strategy

    Order. If questions are long, I will not be able to get everyone in, so I need colleagues to be respectful of other Members.

    Hansard source

  17. ParliamentMs Nusrat Ghani

    Child Poverty Strategy

    We are saving the best until last. I call Josh Fenton-Glynn.

    Hansard source

  18. ParliamentMs Nusrat Ghani

    Child Poverty Strategy

    As an experienced Member of Parliament, the hon. Member will know that she can seek advice from the Speaker’s Office and the Clerks. That is not a point of order, but she has most definitely got her point on the record.

    Hansard source

  19. ParliamentMs Nusrat Ghani

    Employment Rights Bill

    Before we move to consideration of the Lords message, I can confirm that nothing in the Lords message engages Commons financial privilege. Clause 1 Right to guaranteed hours

    Hansard source

  20. ParliamentMs Nusrat Ghani

    Employment Rights Bill

    With this it will be convenient to consider the following: That this House insists on its disagreement with the Lords in their amendments 23 and 106 to 120, does not insist on its amendments 120C, 120D and 120E, and proposes amendments (a) to (f) to the Bill in lieu of Lords amendments 23 and 106 to 120. That this House insists on its disagreement with the Lords in their amendments 23 and 106 to 120. That this House insists on its disagreement with the Lords in their amendment 48B but proposes amendments (a) and (b) to the Bill in lieu of that amendment. That this House does not insist on its amendment 72C in lieu of Lords amendments 61 and 72, but disagrees with the Lords in their amendments 72D to 72H in lieu and proposes further amendments (a) and (b) in lieu of the Lords amendments. That this House insists on its disagreement with the Lords in their amendment 62, but does not insist on its amendment 62C in lieu and proposes further amendment (a) to the Bill in lieu of the Lords amendment.

    Hansard source

  21. ParliamentMs Nusrat Ghani

    Employment Rights Bill

    Order. Colleagues should note that the debate will have to conclude by 7.55 pm, so only a couple of Back-Bench Members will get in. A speaking limit of eight minutes will apply to Back Benchers. I call the shadow Secretary of State.

    Hansard source

  22. ParliamentMs Nusrat Ghani

    Employment Rights Bill

    I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

    Hansard source

  23. ParliamentMs Nusrat Ghani

    Employment Rights Bill

    Order. I assume the intervention will be short. We have we only got 30 minutes left in the debate, so I assume that Ms Olney is coming to a conclusion soon.

    Hansard source

  24. ParliamentMs Nusrat Ghani

    Employment Rights Bill

    The speaking limit is now five minutes.

    Hansard source

  25. ParliamentMr Peter Bedford

    Welfare Spending: Economic Impact

    21. What discussions he has had with the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the potential impact of future welfare spending on the economy.

    Hansard source

  26. ParliamentMr Peter Bedford

    Welfare Spending: Economic Impact

    In their first Budget, the Government hiked taxes on employers, leading to a sustained increase in unemployment. Earlier this year, we saw a botched attempt to reform welfare, which is now going to cost us more in welfare spending, and in the Chancellor’s “Nightmare before Christmas” Budget, she hammered hard-working families with yet more tax rises. Why do the Government loathe aspiration and hard work in favour of an economy based on welfare and state dependency?

    Hansard source

  27. ParliamentMr Mark Francois

    Digital ID

    For the avoidance of doubt, I am on this side of the Westminster Hall Chamber only because it is so packed that this was the only remaining chair. I have not defected to the Labour Party and I never will—nor to anyone else. Can my hon. Friend confirm that this policy was not in Labour’s general election manifesto, so it has absolutely no electoral mandate to extend the surveillance state over the people of this country with this gimmick?

    Hansard source

  28. ParliamentMr Louie French

    Digital ID

    My hon. Friend is making a fantastic speech. Does he agree that this is just the latest example of this Labour Government trying to push through something that was not in their manifesto, and that this House must therefore do all it can to stop it becoming a reality?

    Hansard source

  29. ParliamentMr Louie French

    Child Poverty Strategy

    Despite assurances to the contrary, children in my constituency have had their school courses cut and parents across the UK have lost their jobs because of this Government, with over 180,000 jobs lost over the past year. If unemployment and taxes continue to rise, how many more children does the Secretary of State expect to grow up in poverty—or is this just the price that the welfare party expects families to pay?

    Hansard source

  30. ParliamentMr Gagan Mohindra

  31. ParliamentMr Gagan Mohindra

    Digital ID

    The hon. and learned Gentleman is making an excellent contribution, as always. If this is such an important issue, why was it not in the governing party’s manifesto at the last general election?

    Hansard source

  32. ParliamentMr Gagan Mohindra

    Digital ID

    My hon. Friend is making an excellent contribution, as always. One issue that I recently learned about in the Chamber is that the roll-out of gigabit broadband throughout the country has been delayed by a further two years from 2030 to 2032. Does she share my concerns that the void between the proposed digital inclusion and the constituents who do not have access to gigabit or wi-fi signals will be an even more manifest issue?

    Hansard source

  33. ParliamentMatt Vickers

    Topical Questions

    T7. The Budget introduced more taxes for people who work and more benefits for those who do not. Since the Government came into office, 1 million more people are claiming universal credit. We are now paying out almost £1 billion a month in benefits to foreign national households. Do the Government really think that their £16 billion benefits bung is fair on the hard-working people who have to pay for it?

    Hansard source

  34. ParliamentMatt Vickers

    Maccabi Tel Aviv FC: Away Fans Ban

    I thank my hon. Friend the Member for West Suffolk (Nick Timothy) for securing this critical urgent question. It is important not to forget the context of this decision. It came only weeks after the tragic events of the Heaton Park Hebrew Congregation attack. After the attack, the Prime Minister spoke to the Jewish people. He said that he would do everything in his power to guarantee them the security that they deserve. Yet when it came to a football club predominantly supported by Jewish people, they were suddenly deemed a risk to public safety. That is not just inconsistent but an insult to a community still reeling from a violent antisemitic attack. At a moment when Jewish families needed reassurance, this decision sent entirely the wrong message. It undermined confidence, contradicted the Prime Minister’s own promise and fell short of the duty we owe to the Jewish people to keep them safe. Why was this decision taken? When the Minister addressed the House a couple of weeks ago, she said that the shadow Home Secretary was “jumping the gun a bit” in saying that certain pieces of intelligence were “just made up”. We now know that not only did imaginary matches somehow enter the intelligence picture, but officers giving evidence to Parliament were inaccurate about their dealings with the local Jewish community. That seriously undermines the integrity of this House and the vital work that police forces do in securing accurate intelligence. The Government have asked HMICFRS to review the intelligence, but will the Minister go further and ensure that the details are made public? We need full transparency and more accurate accounts than we have seen so far, so that proper accountability can finally take place.

    Hansard source

  35. ParliamentMark Garnier

    Topical Questions

    The Chancellor’s Budget put a cap on salary sacrifice for pension savers at just £2,000. That was to raise an extra £4.8 billion in 2029, and it will affect 3.3 million savers and 290,000 employers. What research has the Pensions Minister done to understand and quantify the negative effects that this will have on pension savings?

    Hansard source

  36. ParliamentMark Garnier

    Topical Questions

    Well, it was not us who put it in place; it was Labour. This policy hits the private sector disproportionately: 14 times as many people save through salary sacrifice in the private sector as they do in the public sector. Whether it is kite-flying about lump sum withdrawal or taxing inherited pension pots, in a week when Labour Together is canvassing Labour members about a new Labour leader, is it not the case that the Chancellor is more interested in throwing red meat to her sad and unfortunate Back Benchers in a vain attempt to save her job than she is in the interests of the savings of our hard-working constituents?

    Hansard source

  37. ParliamentLincoln Jopp

    Topical Questions

    Following the Budget, a furious Labour voter, 30 years old, texted me to say, “I am furious about the salary sacrifice thing. I give up a lot of things to put 20% of my salary into my pension. That’s going to cost me almost two grand a year for being responsible.” Why are the Government so keen on punishing savers?

    Hansard source

  38. ParliamentLincoln Jopp

    Restriction of Jury Trials

    The Government’s proposals on jury trials are causing concern and consternation in my constituency, and my mailbag is quite full of people’s messages opposing the Government’s proposals. Just so we understand where the Secretary of State is on this, could the Minister please explain to us what he is doing right now such that he could not come and answer this urgent question himself?

    Hansard source

  39. ParliamentLincoln Jopp

    Ajax Armoured Vehicle

    I think the procurement Minister will know that I asked his predecessor whether the National Armaments Director would have carte blanche to tear up the book when it comes to defence procurement. She answered from the Dispatch Box that not only would they have that ability but they would be held to account for so doing. Defence Committee members do not want them coming in front of us in a year’s time to say, “We wanted to change things, but they wouldn’t let us.” Now that the Minister is in his role, will he reassure us that the policy remains that the National Armaments Director, for their £600,000 a year, will be given carte blanche to tear up the book when it comes to procurement?

    Hansard source

  40. ParliamentJulia Lopez

    Digital ID

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Furniss. I commend my hon. Friend the Member for Keighley and Ilkley (Robbie Moore) for his powerful introduction —he is certainly no tin of beans. He highlighted that this debate has united every party in this Chamber, including the Labour party against the Labour leadership. I commend hon. Members for the powerful contributions that they have made. I have to confess that I disagree with nothing that was said by the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Harpenden and Berkhamsted (Victoria Collins), which is a unique thing—people will fear a coalition again. I even have some admiration for the glorious fence-sitting of some of the Labour MPs who still harbour some ambitions under this Government. We are here because so many of our fellow citizens are demanding that the Government abandon their dodgy plan for mandatory digital ID. This is one of the best-supported petitions ever—nearly 3 million people are asking, very simply, for their relationship with the state not to be fundamentally rewritten without their consent. At the instigation of no one—apart from, perhaps, Tony Blair—the Prime Minister sprung his sneaky ID scheme on us in September in what by now has become a familiar pattern. A gaping hole emerges in Labour’s handling of an issue—in this case on migration, but it could equally be justice or the economy—at the same time as they are running some kind of personnel meltdown, such as a Deputy Prime Minister ducking tax or a Chancellor leaking a Budget. And voilà: out shoots from Downing Street some cack-handed policy announcement to get us all talking about something else. Before we know it, we are hurtling toward mandatory ID, fewer jury trials, a horrible menu of new taxes on working people, and, who knows, maybe soon our return to a customs union on whose rules we will have zero say. That is why today we find ourselves debating the imposition of a mandatory ID, despite it being a platform on which no Labour MP in this Chamber was honest enough to stand, and a hapless Minister is left to field questions about the dead cat that his leader just threw on to the table, which is now getting smellier.

    Hansard source